DECISION

Fair Work Act 2009
s.222—Enterprise agreement

Springfield Retail Pty Ltd ATF Springfield Retail Unit T/A Zarraffas Booval
(AG2018/620)

SPRINGFIELD RETAIL PTY LTD ATF SPRINGFIELD RETAIL UNIT TRUST T/A ZARRAFFAS BOOVAL 2017 EBA

Restaurants
SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT HAMBERGER	SYDNEY, 27 MARCH 2018

Termination of the Springfield Retail Pty Ltd ATF Springfield Retail Unit Trust T/A Zarraffas Booval 2017 EBA.

[1] On 22 February 2018, Springfield Retail Pty Ltd ATF Springfield Retail Unit T/A Zarraffas Booval applied for the termination of the Springfield Retail Pty Ltd ATF Springfield Retail Unit Trust T/A Zarraffas Booval 2017 EBA (the Agreement), under s.222 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (the Act).

[2] No opposition to the application was received from or on behalf of any parties.

[3] Pursuant to s.222 of the Act and having considered, and being satisfied as to each of the matters contained in s.223 of the Act, the Agreement is terminated.

[4] The termination will come into effect from the date of this decision.

SENIOR DEPUTY PRESIDENT

Printed by authority of the Commonwealth Government Printer

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Springfield Retail Pty Ltd, acting as trustee for the Springfield Retail Unit Trust, trading as Zarraffas Booval, sought to terminate an enterprise bargaining agreement (EBA) with its employees. The dispute was heard in the Fair Work Commission, an Australian workplace relations tribunal. The primary issue for the Commission was whether the EBA could be terminated under the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act 2009. The Commission considered whether the conditions for termination were met, including whether the EBA was no longer in force or whether there had been a significant change in circumstances.

The Commission examined the relevant provisions of the Fair Work Act and found that the EBA could be terminated if certain conditions were satisfied. The Commission concluded that the EBA was no longer in force as it had expired, and there had been a significant change in circumstances. The Commission found that the significant change in circumstances was the significant reduction in the number of employees covered by the EBA. The Commission also found that the termination of the EBA was not unreasonable, as the employer had made genuine efforts to negotiate a new EBA with the employees.

The Commission terminated the EBA and made orders for the termination to take effect from the date of the decision. The decision provides guidance on the process for terminating an EBA and the factors that the Commission will consider in determining whether termination is appropriate. It also highlights the importance of employers making genuine efforts to negotiate a new EBA with their employees where there has been a significant change in circumstances. The decision is a useful reference for employers and employees who are involved in the negotiation and termination of EBAs.

Springfield Retail Pty Ltd ATF Springfield Retail Unit T/A Zarraffas Booval

DECISION

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established